I always thought this was a disingenuous moment to bring up when discussing the topic in recent times. Your linked video clearly shows what he was looking at -- how is that remotely similar to anything like Dall-E or Midjourney? Miyazaki would love Stable Diffusion. His statement does not at all summarize his stance on AI generated animation because he saw an ugly, miserable representation of what it can do. Timelines regardless.
It gets me worked up.
I think you misunderstand the joy and pride that is an animator, which is in the nuances of the actual creation process which Stable Diffusion removes. We can also compare this to western shows like Arcane, where despite 3d modeling the shading and lighting was done by hand, to immense pride of the animators.
The problem with AI has been always that it removes from the artist the act the artist finds joy in, the work to create a beautiful final product, and leaves only the most boring and meh parts: contract negotiation, right fights, pay and attribution concerns, etc.
Not sure how you could confidently say this. Given that most artists and animators already have a disdain for generative AI, it's difficult to believe that the guy most unenthused about technology would love Stable Diffusion. The guy didn't even like CGI.
> how is that remotely similar to anything like Dall-E or Midjourney?
Miyazaki did not say "I love this tech but it doesn't look good enough yet."
He actually doesn't comment on the quality of the animation at all. His comments are entirely focused on how he feels the technique lacks a human-ness that he thinks is important to art. An early effort you would like to see improved does not "disgust" you or make you feel the creators are "insult[ing] life itself."
Of course he could change his mind, but if you don't think his comments reflect a belief at that moment in time about machines creating art, I do not believe you've understood what he is saying.
